Dynamics of Praxis Function in Children Aged 4-6 Years as an Indicator of School Readiness
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12970/2311-1917.2020.08.04Keywords:
Spatial postural praxis, visual-spatial orientation and movement organization, somatognosis, executive control, heterochronous development, preschool age, sensitive period.Abstract
Praxis functions are among the least studied in childhood, despite data on the relationship between motor development and school achievement. The conducted neuropsychological study evaluates the status of spatial postural praxis (ideomotor praxis for new movements) in 365 children aged 4-6 years. All children attend public kindergarten. A modified version of the Head sample was used. The test is complex in nature, and its performance correlates with other higher functions such as visual-spatial orientation and movement organization, somatognosis and executive (inhibitory) control. The respondents were divided into age, demographic and gender groups. A three-factor analysis of variance was applied that showed a significant effect of all independent factors on the development of children's spatial postural praxis. The influence of the age factor is associated with a progressive decrease in the incidence of inaccurate and echopraxic gesture performance and the influence of the gender factor with the higher achievement of girls than boys.
The data indicate a positive trend in the development of visual-spatial organization of movements and executive control over the period of 4-6 years. Тhis dynamics is an indicator of improved functioning of the frontal-parietal system and the inferior temporal regions of the left hemisphere. The age of 6 years is the first critical period in the development of spatial postural praxis and related visual-spatial and executive functions. The presence of subgroups of children with varying degrees of postural praxis is the result of individual neuropsychic development rates and has the character of a predictor of school achievement.
References
Aхutina TV. Nejropsixologicheskij podxod k diagnostike i korrekcii trudnostej obucheniya pis`mu. Sovremenny`e podxody`k diagnostike i korrekcii rechevy`x rasstrojstv. Sankt Peterburg: SPb Universitet; рр. 195-213.
Glozman ZhM. Nejropsixologicheskoe obsledovanie: kachestvennaya i kolichestvennaya ocenka danny`x. Moskva: Smy`sl 2012.
Piek J, Hands BP, Licari M. Assessment of motor functioning in the preschool period. Neuropsychol Rev 2012; 22(4): 402- 413. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-012-9211-4
Kornev AN. Narusheniya chteniya i pis`ma u detej. Sankt Peterburg: MiM 1997.
Viholainen H, Ahonen T, Lyytinen P, et al. Early motor development and later language reading skills in children at risk of familial dyslexia. Dev Med Child Neurol 2006; 48(5): 367-373. https://doi.org/10.1017/S001216220600079X
Fawcett AJ, Nicolson RI. Persistent deficits in motor skill of children with dyslexia. Journal of Motor Behavior 1995; 27(3): 235-240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00222895
Williams JH, Waiter GD, Gilchrist A, et al. Neural mechanisms of imitation and 'mirror neuron' functioning in autistic spectrum disorder. Neuropsychologia 2006; 44(4): 610-621. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.06.010
Rizzolatti G, Fabbri-Destro M. Mirror neurons: From discovery to Autism. Experimental Brain Research 2010; 200(3-4): 223-237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-009-2002-3
Williams JHG, Whiten A, Suddendorf T, Perrett DI. Imitation, mirror neurons and autism. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2001; 25(4): 287-295. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-7634(01)00014-8
Iacoboni M, Dapretto M. The mirror neuron system and the consequences of its dysfunction. Nature Rev Neurosci 2007; 7: 942-951.
Aziz-Zadeh L, Koski L, Zaidel E, Mazziotta J, Iacoboni M. Lateralization of the human mirror neuron system. J Neurosci 2006; 26(11): 2964-70. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2921-05.2006
Mühlau M, Hermsdörfer J, Goldenberg G, et al. Left inferior parietal dominance in gesture imitation: an fMRI study. Neuropsychologia 2005; 43(7): 1086-98. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2004.10.004
Molenberghs P, Cunnington R, Mattingley JB. Is the mirror neuron system involved in imitation? A short review and meta-analysis. Neurosci Bioвеhav Rev 2009; 33(7): 975-980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.03.010
Tonkonogij IM. Vvedenie v klinicheskuyu nejropsixologiyu. Leningrad: Medicina, Leningradskoe otdelenie 1973.
Cooper R, Shallice T. Contention scheduling and the control of routine activities. Cogn Neuropsychology 2000; 17(4): 297-338. https://doi.org/10.1080/026432900380427
Casey BJ, Tottenham N, Liston C, Durston S. Imaging the developing brain: what have we learned? Trends in Cogn Sci 2005; 9 (3): 104-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.01.011
Coull JT. Neural correlates of attention and arousal: insights from electrophysiology, functional neuroimaging and psychopharmacology. Prog Neurobiol 1998; 55(4): 343-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0301-0082(98)00011-2
Machinskaya RI, Lukashevich IP, Fishman MN. Dinamika e`lektricheskoj aktivnosti mozga u detej 5-8-letnego vozrasta v norme i pri trudnostyax obucheniya. Fiziologiya cheloveka 1997; 23 (5): 5-11.
Korkman M, Kemp SL, Kirk U. Effect of age of neurocognitive mesuares of children age 5 to 12: a croos-sectional study on 800 children from the Unated States. Dev Neuropsychology 2001; 20 (1): 331-54. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326942DN2001_2
Vanvuchelen M, Roeyers H, De Weerdt W. Objectivity and stability of the Preschool Imitation and Praxis Scale. American Journal of Occupational Therapy 2011; 65: 569- 577. Available from: https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2010.ajot00000414
Semenovich AV. V labirintax razvivayushhegosya mozga. Shifry`i kody`nejropsixologii. Moskva: Genezis 2010.
Kolb B, Fantie BD. Development of the Child’s Brain and Behaviour. In: Reynolds CR, Fletcher-Janzen E. (eds) Handbook of Clinical Child Neuropsychology. Springer, Boston, MA 2009; рр. 19-46. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-78867-8_2
